| Popis: |
An analysis of the constitutions of the world reveals that the vast majority of states profess to guarantee fundamental freedoms and civil and human rights. Yet, according to Professor Max Lamberty of Brussels these rights pertain to individuals (‘the rights of man’) rather than to groups (‘the rights of community’). He claims that there is no charter to which groups, minority groups, in any constitutional system, can appeal directly for the protection of their subjective rights and interests (see Max Lamberty, 1971, p. 30). This is the typical pattern followed in the Western liberal-democratic tradition. The socialistic tradition, on the other hand, refers to the rights of the state and/or party and the interests of the working classes. It is interesting to note that neither the Covenant of the League of Nations nor the Charter of the United Nations refer to the ‘rights’ or ‘interests’ of minorities. The Covenant of the League referred to the ‘sacred trust of the civilization’ of ‘those peoples not yet able to stand by themselves’. The Charter of the UN again enshrines the principle of the ‘self-determination of peoples’. So both these documents refer to ‘peoples’, in other words to groups, but do not attempt to define the concept of ‘people’, whether it be a homogeneous or plural entity. The well-known authority on international law, J. G. Starke, QC, submits that aspects such as common territory, common language, and common political aims may be considered (see J. G. Starke, 1967, p. 120). Starke therefore looks at ‘people’ from a homogeneous point of view. This is in line with anthropological thinking as well. This type of anthropological approach to ‘people’ is broadly synonymous with the views of some authors who have tried to define ‘minority groups’. |
